Habeas Corpus petitions about child custody require proof of illegal confinement; welfare of the child is paramount and factors like the mother's character are significant.

ORDER :

Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J.

This writ petition for Habeas Corpus under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, seeking direction to respondent Nos.3 and 4-Police officials to produce the corpus, who is a minor girl by name Hanvita Arun, aged about four years, who is the daughter of the petitioner, said to have been in illegal custody of respondent No.5, before the Court and to give her custody to the petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of the learned Advocate General appearing for official respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Mr. Shaik Sulthan, learned counsel representing Mr. P.Sashidhar Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.5.

3. The petitioner is the wife of a person by name Arun Teja Posa. They begot a female child by name Hanvita Arun (hereinafter referred to as ‘corpus’) during their lawful wedlock. Unfortunately, the husband of the petitioner passed away on 06.06.2023 due to ill-health. According to the petitioner, her daughter was in her custody, after the death of her husband and she has been taking care of her. While so, it is pleaded that the 5^th respondent, who is the paternal aunt of her husband has taken the daughter of the petitioner with her in the first week of April 2025 on the pretext of taking her for a short visit and thereafter, she did not return the child to the petitioner. It is stated that inspite of her repeated requests to return the child to her that the 5^th respondent did not return the corpus to the petitioner. So, it is alleged that the petitioner has lodged a report with the Police. But, no action has been taken by the Police to give back the custody of the corpus to the petitioner. Therefore, she has filed the instant writ petition, seeking the aforesaid relief.

4. The 5^th respondent filed her counter affidavit. In her counter, it is categorically admitted that the petitioner is the wife of Posa Arun Teja, who is the nephew of the 5^th respondent and that the corpus was born to them during their lawful wedlock. However, it is pleaded that after the demise of the husband of the petitioner, the petitioner herself has left the corpus at the residence of the 5^th respondent and since then, the corpus is in the custody of the 5^th respondent and she and her family members have been taking care of the corpus and also providing education to her and looking after her welfare. It is further pleaded that the petitioner did not take up the responsibility of the child after the demise of her husband and she did not show any concern towards the child and it is pleaded that at no point of time the 5^th respondent and her family members prevented the petitioner from visiting the child and to spend time with her. It is pleaded that the writ petition has been filed with all false allegations. Further, the 5^th respondent has specifically pleaded that the petitioner is involved in many criminal cases including the cases relating to Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and in view of the said conduct of the petitioner that it is not safe to keep the minor child in the custody of the petitioner. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

5. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit. In the said reply affidavit, while admitting that criminal cases are registered against her, she has pleaded that the said criminal cases ended in acquittal. She has further admitted in the reply affidavit at para No.7 that after the unfortunate demise of her husband that she was in emotional and mental stress and at that time she has temporarily left the corpus with the family of her husband, believing that they